Mustafa Barak t/a Moulin Rouge Fish and Chips v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 21 August 2026
Neutral citation: [2026] UKFTT 1224 (TC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: high
This tax appeal concerned four Eat Out to Help Out Scheme (EOHOS) claims of £19,500 and an HMRC assessment recovering that sum. The Tribunal held the assessment was valid (formalities met and Officer Moss satisfied both subjective belief and objective reasonableness requirements) and dismissed the appeal because the appellant failed to prove, with required records, by how much the assessment was excessive. The assessment therefore stood (with only unspecified, minor agreed adjustments).
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high
For a valid EOHOS assessment under para 9 Schedule 16 FA 2020, the assessing officer must both subjectively believe the claimant received payments to which they were not entitled and that belief must be one a reasonable officer could form on the available material; once HMRC discharges that burden the taxpayer must prove on the balance of probabilities that the assessment is excessive and quantify the correct amount, failing which the assessment stands.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
The Tribunal observed it could not entertain a Wednesbury public law challenge because it lacked the supervisory jurisdiction to apply that principle in this context, and noted the EOHOS Guidance’s specific record-keeping expectations (daily covers, value of eat-in sales where discounts applied, total discounts) as the sensible basis for demonstrating entitlement.
Warning
- The chunk contains substantial repetition of the same material (duplicated passages). The provided notes contain substantial repetition and may be incomplete.